Reasoned decision in Ayşe Barım case announced: She effectively directed actors to the field

In the reasoned decision prepared by the Istanbul 26th High Criminal Court, it was alleged that the Gezi Park protests were carried out in an organized, systematic, and planned manner, and that the defendant Barım, during this process, acted with intent in planning, organizing, and directing on the field and on social media on behalf of artists and actors who had high potential to lead the masses due to public sympathy.

The decision included the following statements in the evaluation regarding Barım:

"While there were no communication records prior to the Gezi Park events with the main actors of Gezi Park, she was in frequent and systematic contact during the preparation and beginning phase of the Gezi Park protests; these meetings, which took place for the first time during the Gezi Park protest process, cannot be considered coincidental meetings within the ordinary flow of life; although they were presented as seemingly democratic rights and innocent protest demonstrations, the main purpose was to create an environment of chaos and turmoil nationwide and in this way to overthrow the Government of the Republic of Turkey; through the artists affiliated with her company, she ensured that they systematically shared the most used hashtags of the process, #occupyturkey and #DirenGeziParkı, on Twitter, which was the area where the Gezi uprising was primarily organized from the beginning, as an effective part of the process, thus assuming an active role on behalf of the artist community and engaging in directing activities within the scope of spreading the process..."

The decision stated that it was understood that Barım met with artists affiliated with her talent agency in an organized manner at Gezi Park in line with communication records, and that some of these individuals read declarations. It was alleged that the defendant supported the process, ensured its spread, and paved the way for the escalation of violent incidents by making calls for protests through the artists affiliated with her company.

BARIM'S CONTACT WITH MAIN DEFENDANTS OF THE GEZI TRIAL

In the decision, it was claimed that Barım effectively directed the actors under her management to the field as part of the planning and organization of the artists' movement during the Gezi Park events.

It was argued that by coordinating the corporate social media accounts of ID İletişim Danışmanlık AŞ, the social media accounts of the artists affiliated with her company, and the artists participating in the protests on the field, she participated in the crime of "attempting to overthrow the Government of the Republic of Turkey or preventing it from performing its duties" by providing a suitable environment for the activities of illegal armed terrorist organizations and marginal groups such as the PKK/KCK, DHKP-C, TKP/ML-TİKKO, and MLKP, which were always ready to carry out terrorist acts in the resulting chaos, and by plunging society into an environment of chaos.

The decision stated that in addition to being in direct contact with fugitive Mehmet Ali Alabora and convicted Çiğdem Mater Utku, who are among the main defendants of the Gezi Trial, Barım was identified as the "person who showed intent, was consulted, and whose approval was sought."

The decision stated that it was clearly understood that Barım was a guiding and decisive figure who planned, organized, and directed the events, and whose intent was sought and who provided direction by declaring her own decisions. It was alleged that by directing well-known artists and actors affiliated with her company to the protests, she aimed to make the events more massive by using the recognition and influence of these individuals in society.

In the decision, where it was claimed that although the aforementioned artists and actors stated in their testimonies taken at various stages that they participated in the protests of their own volition, the content of their narratives was contradictory to each other and within themselves, it was alleged that they could not explain the content of their intense contact with the defendant regarding the period when the protests began in a way consistent with the ordinary flow of life.

The decision included the following statements: "Thus, it was understood that the defendant, who acted together with the other convict Mehmet Osman Kavala, who was the main actor in the organization of the Gezi Park protests and financed these actions, as well as fugitive defendant Mehmet Ali Alabora and convict Çiğdem Mater Utku, facilitated the execution of the charged crime by providing assistance through active planning, organization, and protest direction on the field on behalf of the artist community during the Gezi Park events, by effectively using and directing the artists affiliated with her to the field."

WITNESSES AND BARIM'S STATEMENTS FOUND CONTRADICTORY

The decision stated that Bergüzar Gökçe Ergenç, Ceyda Düvenci, Dolunay Soysert, Hümeyra, Mehmet Günsür, Nehir Erdoğan, Nejat İşler, Nur Fettahoğlu, Rıza Kocaoğlu, Selma Ergeç, Şükran Ovalı, and Zafer Algöz, who are affiliated with the talent agency ID İletişim owned by Barım, were heard as witnesses. It was reported that they stated in their declarations that they managed their own social media accounts, that they made the posts they made during the Gezi Park events themselves, and that they participated in the Gezi Park events in line with their own will.

The decision noted that Halit Ergenç, when asked about the management of his social media accounts, replied, "Ayşe Barım does not manage them, there is a social media management department that manages them," and said that there was no direction from the defendant in his participation in the Gezi Park events.

The decision recorded that Barım, in her defense in court, used the following expressions regarding the organizational structure of the talent agency she owns: "My office has had a press department since the day it was first established. Since I come from the media sector and my press relations are extremely strong, I also manage that department separately."

In the reasoned decision, it was stated that Barım's explanation regarding her company's organizational structure contradicted Halit Ergenç's statement that "there is a social media management department that manages them" and the statements of other witnesses, and it was emphasized that the statements given by the witnesses contradicted the statement Barım made in her defense regarding her participation in the Gezi events.